ArticleScientific reports2025
A nationwide population-based study on epidemiologic characteristics and treatment patterns of dry eye disease in South Korea.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated the prevalence of dry eye disease (DED) and the use of major DED medications in South Korea using data from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment database, a nationwide registry with mandatory enrollment. A total of 6,383,885 individuals from 2016 to 2020 were included, selected annually through stratified random sampling. Patients with DED were identified by the ICD-10 code H04.1 assigned as the primary diagnosis by a clinician. Among the total population, 567,141 were diagnosed with DED, yielding a 5-year prevalence of 8.88%. Prevalence was higher in females (11.52%) than in males (5.92%) and increased with age, reaching 21.96% in individuals aged 70-74. Among DED patients, 86.91% received at least one medication. Single-use hyaluronic acid (HA) was most commonly prescribed (43.0%), followed by bottled steroids (24.5%), bottled HA (19.6%), and bottled diquafosol (4.3%). Annual prescriptions of cyclosporine and single-use steroids increased over time. Older patients were more likely to receive bottled formulations than single-use medication. This is the first nationwide study to examine DED prescription patterns on a large-scale population basis in South Korea, and the findings highlight the accessibility of HA-based therapies within a universal health coverage system, offering a distinct perspective compared to global patterns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.